Dharam Pal v. Bank Of Maharashtra And ORS.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

**** RSA-3300-1996 Date of decision: 20.11.2025 Dharam Pal Arya and another . . . . Appellants Vs.

Bank of Maharashtra and others . . . . Respondents ****

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR JUSTICE DEEPAK GUPTA **** Present: - None for the appellants.

**** DEEPAK GUPTA, J. (ORAL) In compliance of the order dated 30.11.2023, notice was sent to the appellants. Appellant No.1 has been duly served through his son, but nobody has put in appearance on his behalf. Notice issued to appellant No.2 has been received back unserved as he was not found residing at the given address. No other address of appellant No.2 is available on record. Services of respondents No.2 to 13 has already been dispensed with. Respondent No.1 has also been served through Bank Manager, but there is no representation on behalf of respondent No.1. All the aforesaid circumstances indicate that appellants are no longer interested in pursuing the present appeal. As such, the same is hereby dismissed in default for want of prosecution. (DEEPAK GUPTA) 20.11.2025 JUDGE  Whether Speaking/reasoned Yes Whether reportable No VIVEK PAHWA 2025.11.20 17:10 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh